US Law Enforcement Using UAVs

[Kennedy 0]

I'm still trying to decide how I feel about this. I'm glad officers and suspects are safer, but not so sure about the "flying in a plane=plain sight exception" concept.

Quote

Meet the North Dakota family of anti-government separatists busted by cops using a Predator drone

Meet the Brossarts, a North Dakota family deemed so dangerous that the local sheriff needed unleashed an unmanned Predator drone to help bring them in.

The Brossart's alleged crime? They wouldn't give back three cows and their calves that wandered onto their 3,000-acre farm this summer.
The same aerial vehicles used by the CIA to track down and assassinate terrorists and militants in Pakistan and Afghanistan are now being deployed by cops to spy on Americans in their own backyards.

snip

Local authorities say the Brossarts are known for being armed, anti-government separatists whose sprawling farm is used as a compound. Rodney Brossart, 55, and his wife Susan live in a house and a trailer and two RVs with seven of their eight adult children.

snip

When cops returned to collect the lost cattle, three of Brossart's sons - Alex, Jacob and Thomas - confronted Sheriff Janke with rifles and shotguns and would not allow officers on the farm

That's when the sheriff summoned a $154 million MQ-9 Predator B drone from nearby Grand Forks Air Force Base, where it was patrolling the US-Canida border for the US Department of Homeland Security.

Using a handheld device that picked up the video camera footage from the spy plane, Sheriff Janke was able to watch the movements of everyone on the farm.

During an 16-hour standoff, the sheriff and his deputies waited until they could see the remaining Brossarts put down their weapons. Then, dressed in SWAT gear, they stormed the compound and arrested the three Brossart sons. No shots were fired.

snip

There are also other instances where departments are tryign to buy their own UAVs for law enforcement, just much smaller and less high tech. This ND instance has the additional twist of using federal (military?) resources.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[normiss 886]

I expect some warrant-less search challenges....

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

I expect some warrant-less search challenges....

I wouldn’t think so. Aerial surveillance of matters in sight from publicly accessible places have not been seen as violating the Fourth Amendment. Courts have found that if something is visible from a public space, there’s no Fourth Amendment protection.

In the mid 90’s there was a case where cops used a helicopter equipped with Forward Leaning Infrared Radar to detect light and heat coming from lights suspected to grow marijuana. They compared the IR signature of the guy’s house with that of surrounding houses and found it emitted a lot more IR light. Along with information that he’d increased his power usage, ordered sodium lights and hydroponics equipment, they executed a search warrant and found that he’d been growing pot.

The trial court and appellate court denied his motion to suppress the warrant because the FLIR search violated the Fourth Amendment. It was held that the FLIR search did not reveal “intimate details.” The IR light was, after all, escaping and was detected. Put out in public view.

These guys, if in the open, don’t have an expectation of privacy as a matter of law.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[normiss 886]

Interesting. I do vaguely remember that case too.
Good basis it would seem.

[Andrewwhyte 1]

It still looks like law enforcement by the US military to me.

[wayneflorida 0]

Quote

Quote

I expect some warrant-less search challenges....

I wouldn’t think so. Aerial surveillance of matters in sight from publicly accessible places have not been seen as violating the Fourth Amendment. Courts have found that if something is visible from a public space, there’s no Fourth Amendment protection.

In the mid 90’s there was a case where cops used a helicopter equipped with Forward Leaning Infrared Radar to detect light and heat coming from lights suspected to grow marijuana. They compared the IR signature of the guy’s house with that of surrounding houses and found it emitted a lot more IR light. Along with information that he’d increased his power usage, ordered sodium lights and hydroponics equipment, they executed a search warrant and found that he’d been growing pot.

The trial court and appellate court denied his motion to suppress the warrant because the FLIR search violated the Fourth Amendment. It was held that the FLIR search did not reveal “intimate details.” The IR light was, after all, escaping and was detected. Put out in public view.

These guys, if in the open, don’t have an expectation of privacy as a matter of law.

This was not just random surveillance. It was a standoff. Kind of like sneaking a wire in pizza boxes for the bank robbers holding hostages.

Yesterday the story was they used the drone to find the cattle. This current and probably more accurate story the sheriff used the drone only after the standoff started.

[BikerBabe 0]

Ok. Let me inject some facts into this conversation...

First: credentials (because I don't post here all that much anymore and internet trolls are frequenting even this board). 1. I am married to a man who is a program manager for the MQ9 program at General Atomics. He knows who they sell the planes to. I speak to my husband on a regular basis (go figure) thus I know who they are sold to, barring anything classified. 2. I am a former Air Force acquisition officer who knows how selling shit to the military works, and also understands the structure of the federal government.

Now. some points.

1. Homeland Security is NOT the military.

2. The MQ-9 has been sold to many agencies besides the US military, including DHS and the border patrol.

3. Just because an asset is housed at a military base doesn't mean it belongs to the military. NASA has planes at several Air Force Bases, for example.

Now, the real argument seems to be the extent to which posse comitatus applies nowadays, and whether the lines between military and other federal agencies are blurring too much. That's probably something the supreme court would have to decide, but as it stands now, local cops can probably legally get around it by using assets owned by DHS rather than DOD.

Never meddle in the affairs of dragons, for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup!

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Ok. Let me inject some facts into this conversation...

First: credentials (because I don't post here all that much anymore and internet trolls are frequenting even this board). 1. I am married to a man who is a program manager for the MQ9 program at General Atomics. He knows who they sell the planes to. I speak to my husband on a regular basis (go figure) thus I know who they are sold to, barring anything classified. 2. I am a former Air Force acquisition officer who knows how selling shit to the military works, and also understands the structure of the federal government.

Now. some points.

1. Homeland Security is NOT the military.

2. The MQ-9 has been sold to many agencies besides the US military, including DHS and the border patrol.

3. Just because an asset is housed at a military base doesn't mean it belongs to the military. NASA has planes at several Air Force Bases, for example.

Now, the real argument seems to be the extent to which posse comitatus applies nowadays, and whether the lines between military and other federal agencies are blurring too much. That's probably something the supreme court would have to decide, but as it stands now, local cops can probably legally get around it by using assets owned by DHS rather than DOD.

This does appear to be more of a LEO owned asset with a military design, as opposed to a Military Owned asset loaned to the LEO. Much like an M-4 or M-24 weapon or a MM-6 Helo.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[gher 0]

Quote

It still looks like law enforcement by the US military to me.

The aircraft was DHS, not DoD. Only the airfield is DoD. The forest service uses DoD airfields to fight fires, and this does not constitute the DoD figthing fires...

[kelpdiver 2]

on the surface this seems like a saner use of the technology - used to make a raid safer. The usual method has been to storm in, shoot everything in sight, right? Perhaps a little hyperbole, but Waco and Ruby Ridge weren't fine moments.

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

[normiss 886]

Hopefully it will be a news helicopter of the Fox flavor.

[quade 4]

Quote

In the mid 90’s there was a case where cops used a helicopter equipped with Forward Leaning Infrared Radar to detect light and heat coming from lights suspected to grow marijuana.

Uh . . . I don't think so.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[lawrocket 3]

Okay. Forward Looking

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[gher 0]

Quote

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

Not likely. A two man team operates these UAVs: The Pilot keeps the bird flying, whereas the Sensor Operator takes care of the surveillance.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

Not likely. A two man team operates these UAVs: The Pilot keeps the bird flying, whereas the Sensor Operator takes care of the surveillance.

And how attentive is that guy, staring at a monitor on a long flying craft often in a near hover? Remote controlled is the problem here. Not only is it harder to see, the motivation is a bit diminished.

It feels like the same big sky mentality that many jumpers put faith into.

[Kennedy 0]

If you mean Kyllo v US, then I think you got it backwards. SCOTUS ruled the using IR tech to scan a house was a "search" under the 4th requiring a warrant.

I don't know what case(s) covered planes and helicopters flying over otherwise private and cordoned-off areas.

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[matthewcline 0]

Quote

Quote

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

Not likely. A two man team operates these UAVs: The Pilot keeps the bird flying, whereas the Sensor Operator takes care of the surveillance.

It happens, but not too often as the few incidents have been confined to the various Mil bases. They are still "flown" by people and people get tired and or lazy.

Matt

An Instructors first concern is student safety.
So, start being safe, first!!!

[jakee 1,585]

Quote

where it was patrolling the US-Canida border

Score one for journalism.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[gher 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

Not likely. A two man team operates these UAVs: The Pilot keeps the bird flying, whereas the Sensor Operator takes care of the surveillance.

And how attentive is that guy, staring at a monitor on a long flying craft often in a near hover? Remote controlled is the problem here. Not only is it harder to see, the motivation is a bit diminished.

It feels like the same big sky mentality that many jumpers put faith into.

A bit of a difference between a USN/USAF/US Army-trained duo of Aviators and some Jackwagon who went to a tiny DZ and did AFF...

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

I'm still trying to decide how I feel about this. I'm glad officers and suspects are safer, but not so sure about the "flying in a plane=plain sight exception" concept.

This particular employment seems common sense and reasonable.

But the problem is, that once law enforcement gets a tool or technique, there are always some in their profession who will use it to unreasonable ends.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

In the mid 90’s there was a case where cops used a helicopter equipped with Forward Leaning Infrared Radar to detect light and heat coming from lights suspected to grow marijuana. They compared the IR signature of the guy’s house with that of surrounding houses and found it emitted a lot more IR light. Along with information that he’d increased his power usage, ordered sodium lights and hydroponics equipment, they executed a search warrant and found that he’d been growing pot.

The trial court and appellate court denied his motion to suppress the warrant because the FLIR search violated the Fourth Amendment. It was held that the FLIR search did not reveal “intimate details.” The IR light was, after all, escaping and was detected. Put out in public view.

These guys, if in the open, don’t have an expectation of privacy as a matter of law.

Counselor, I'm not sure if it is the same case you are referring to but in some cases thermal imaging has been ruled to be a search. See the Supreme Court ruling in Kyllo v. United States. It was not from a helicopter.

I do agree that aerial surveillance is not likely to be ruled a warrantless search.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[masterrig 1]

Quote

on the surface this seems like a saner use of the technology - used to make a raid safer. The usual method has been to storm in, shoot everything in sight, right? Perhaps a little hyperbole, but Waco and Ruby Ridge weren't fine moments.

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

I tend to agree with you. This does seem like a more sane approach to a stand-off. the Sheriff can keep an 'eye' on things while planning the best approach to the situation. Rather than smashing in doors with guns blazing. Also, it's a good example of law enforcement agencies working together rather than a case of egoes fighting each other for 'who's in charge'.
Also, while all this is going on, the 'family' is stacking-up charges against themselves.


Chuck

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

The big concern to me with the growing domestic use gets back to the issues of VFR space, and how long it takes until they crash into something when they spend all their time looking down at the ground.

Not likely. A two man team operates these UAVs: The Pilot keeps the bird flying, whereas the Sensor Operator takes care of the surveillance.

And how attentive is that guy, staring at a monitor on a long flying craft often in a near hover? Remote controlled is the problem here. Not only is it harder to see, the motivation is a bit diminished.

It feels like the same big sky mentality that many jumpers put faith into.

A bit of a difference between a USN/USAF/US Army-trained duo of Aviators and some Jackwagon who went to a tiny DZ and did AFF...

Is there? There's a big overlap between the military folks and the jumpers. And the 45 degree rule lives on well outside of the tiny DZs.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

Quote

In the mid 90’s there was a case where cops used a helicopter equipped with Forward Leaning Infrared Radar to detect light and heat coming from lights suspected to grow marijuana. They compared the IR signature of the guy’s house with that of surrounding houses and found it emitted a lot more IR light. Along with information that he’d increased his power usage, ordered sodium lights and hydroponics equipment, they executed a search warrant and found that he’d been growing pot.

The trial court and appellate court denied his motion to suppress the warrant because the FLIR search violated the Fourth Amendment. It was held that the FLIR search did not reveal “intimate details.” The IR light was, after all, escaping and was detected. Put out in public view.

These guys, if in the open, don’t have an expectation of privacy as a matter of law.

Counselor, I'm not sure if it is the same case you are referring to but in some cases thermal imaging has been ruled to be a search. See the Supreme Court ruling in Kyllo v. United States. It was not from a helicopter.

I do agree that aerial surveillance is not likely to be ruled a warrantless search.

I remember learning similar cases from when I was in law school in the early 80's, so I'm presuming the cases were probably from the 70's. Lower-tech scenario. Police helicopter used to visually locate pot patch out in the open out-of-doors. Ruled not an unlawful warrantless search (meaning the evidence was admitted at trial) because it was out in the open, and not covered-over in any way, so no expectation of privacy.

On the other hand, infra-red sensors to locate heat signatures inside a closed building might well be on the other side of the intellectual line because, unlike an un-covered pot patch outdoors, there is generally an expectation of privacy inside a closed building.

[Southern_Man 0]

Quote

Police helicopter used to visually locate pot patch out in the open out-of-doors. Ruled not an unlawful warrantless search (meaning the evidence was admitted at trial) because it was out in the open, and not covered-over in any way, so no expectation of privacy.

On the other hand, infra-red sensors to locate heat signatures inside a closed building might well be on the other side of the intellectual line because, unlike an un-covered pot patch outdoors, there is generally an expectation of privacy inside a closed building.

Several years ago I worked with a fella who was a totally untreated paranoid schizophrenic. He grew quite a bit of pot on his mother's farm where he lived. Undoubtedly self-medicating with it. Anyway, like many people with schizophrenia he had the fear that the government was watching him and was out to get him. Sure enough, the summer before I moved the police surveyed the property from the air and arrested him for growing maijuana. Just because you are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"